Engineer decision splits school board along party lines

The search for a new engineering firm has stirred up accusations of political preferences among school board members.

Discussions surrounding the proposed firms at the Jan. 24 meeting visibly ignited political tensions on the nine-member board.

The request for proposals for an engineer was first sent out in November, but discussions on the candidates were delayed, causing the board to re-send the request, resulting in one additional firm.

A few of the 14 original firms made presentations to the full board, but only the business committee has seen the presentation of the latest firm to be added into the mix, Maser Consulting.

The board was split 5-4 on whether the full board should be allowed to hear Maser’s presentation before voting, or if the board should just take the business committee’s recommendation, since those members had heard from all the firms.

“It’s important for the full board to come in and see the full vendor presentation,” said board member Andrew Walter, who is on the business committee with Board President Stephen Altamuro, Kurt Snyder and Ginny Murphy. “The last thing we want to do as the business committee is say ‘Here’s our recommendation’ without getting their input.”

However, board member Josh Aronovitch preferred the business committee give its input, rather than have a full presentation from Maser. During the meeting, he called for a vote to move the discussion to the executive session so the committee could give a report and the full board could vote after. Walter was frustrated at Aronovitch’s desire to vote with only the committee’s input, and brought up political ties as a possible motivation for Aronovitch’s eagerness to vote without hearing Maser’s proposal.

The meeting got heated as Walter talked about board members calling each other to see who was voting for which firm and pushing political agendas.

Walter, Altamuro, Ginny Murphy, Chet Nawoyski, and Paul Marino voted to move the discussion to the next meeting so they could hear the firm’s full presentation. Their majority vote won over Eileen Abbott, Aronovitch, Jim Murphy and Kurt Snyder, who voted against it and favored just hearing the business committee’s report.

“I was disappointed to hear four members did not want to see an additional vendor, which leads me to believe they have already made up their minds,” Walter said. “I hope people are making the decision based on the best person for the district and not their political affiliation.”

In terms of political alignments, Walter and Marino have run for county freeholder seats as Republicans and Altamuro was a Republican township councilman for four years. Aronovitch has campaigned for both mayor and council seats on the Democratic ticket.

One of the 15 firms that submitted a proposal, and is among the finalists being considered, is Remington and Vernick — the firm that has had a contract with the district for the past decade.

Altamuro raised concerns about renewing the contract with Remington & Vernick, since they are the firm that designed the much-debated sidewalk at Bunker Hill Middle School.

Parents attended many meetings last summer, complaining that the sidewalk, built just feet from the side of the busy Pitman-Downer Road, posed a danger to students. The district has since agreed to move the sidewalk for safety reasons and is responsible for the cost of tearing it up and replacing it.

“It was not in practicality and common sense standards,” Altamuro said. “Why should they get awarded a new contract when you’re costing us money on that sidewalk?” Altamuro said.

Both Maser and Remington and Vernick have made campaign contributions to various political parties throughout the state, according to state campaign finance reports. Maser’s contributions have gone to a majority of Republican candidates, specifically in Monmouth County, where the firm is based. Remington and Vernick, of Haddonfield, has consistently made contributions to the local Democratic candidates in Washington Township.

Aronovitch, who pushed for anti-pay-to-play regulations on the local level a few years ago, said that his desire to just hear the business committee’s recommendation and vote that evening was not in his own political interest, but to stop the political games of the other board members.

“The question of who will be the engineer has been going on since November,” he said. “There were many opportunities for discussion on the issue that were put off repeatedly by the board president (Altamuro) because he didn’t have the votes to do what he wanted. Appointing an engineer for political reasons makes no sense, but getting rid of an engineer that’s done a fantastic job for 10 years for political reasons doesn’t make any sense either.”